The Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) in Tamil Nadu on Tuesday termed President Droupadi Murmu’s decision to return the Tamil Nadu University of Madras Amendment Bill “unfortunate,” asserting that the move reflects the Bharatiya Janata Party’s (BJP) attempt to interfere in the state’s educational governance. The ruling party in Tamil Nadu also stated that it is “exploring options” regarding the future course of action for the bill, emphasizing that its approach will remain within legal and constitutional boundaries.

Speaking to reporters, DMK spokesperson and legal counsel A Saravanan said, “The party is exploring options. We aren’t doing anything illegal but just implementing the will of the people. It is unfortunate that the President returned the Bill. The BJP is playing politics. They are defending it saying it will flout UGC guidelines, but that’s an executive order which has no bearing on the legislative power of the state government.”

The bill, originally passed by the Tamil Nadu Assembly in April 2022, sought to amend the University of Madras Act by transferring the authority to appoint and remove vice chancellors from the Governor—who serves as the chancellor of the university—to the state government. Essentially, the proposed amendment replaced the term “chancellor” with “government,” aiming to give the elected state administration the power to make key appointments in the universities.

Earlier, Governor RN Ravi had reserved the bill for presidential consideration, citing concerns that it could conflict with University Grants Commission (UGC) regulations and established norms regarding vice chancellor appointments. The Governor held the bill for over a year before forwarding it to the President. With the President now returning the bill, the Tamil Nadu assembly will have to reconsider the proposed legislation. State officials emphasized that this issue gains additional significance in the context of the upcoming assembly elections, as the Tamil Nadu legislative session is scheduled to begin on January 20, 2026.

The bill’s return comes amid a backdrop of ongoing administrative difficulties within Tamil Nadu’s universities. Out of 22 state universities, including the University of Madras, 14 have been functioning under convener committees due to the absence of regular vice chancellors. The DMK government has repeatedly argued that empowering the state government to appoint vice chancellors is essential to ensure continuity, stability, and effective governance within these institutions.

The ongoing friction between the state government and Governor Ravi is not new. In recent years, the Governor has withheld assent to multiple state bills, some for periods exceeding two years, before forwarding ten of them to the President after the assembly re-enacted them. The DMK challenged these delays in the Supreme Court earlier this year, seeking clarity on the constitutional limits of gubernatorial discretion in clearing state legislation.

DMK allies also criticized the Union government’s role in the matter. Communist Party of India (CPI) state secretary M Veerapandian stated, “This shows the BJP government’s ideological interference in higher education. The Bill being returned is part of the BJP government’s plan to saffronize educational institutions.” The DMK and its allies maintain that the central government’s interventions undermine the autonomy of state universities and hinder academic decision-making at the local level.

The BJP state unit, however, strongly rejected these claims, accusing the DMK of politicizing education. BJP leader A Prasad told reporters, “DMK shamelessly accuses and hypocritically cries foul against BJP for the President’s return of the Madras University Amendment Bill, claiming BJP is politicizing education—yet it is DMK that is undermining Tamil students by injecting politics into higher education. Their actions on anti-NEET propaganda, language fanaticism, and vote-bank appeasement sacrifice merit and progress on the altar of electoral greed.”

Chief Minister M K Stalin, speaking in November, had responded to a Supreme Court opinion on a Presidential Reference, noting that governors and the President cannot be bound by judicially imposed timelines. Stalin stressed that the ruling would not impact the April 8 landmark judgment in the case of the State of Tamil Nadu versus its governor, which addressed Governor Ravi’s delays in approving bills. In that judgment, the Supreme Court had struck down the Governor’s decision to reserve ten re-enacted state bills for presidential assent, deeming the action “erroneous” and in violation of the Constitution. A majority of these bills concerned the transfer of powers related to vice chancellor appointments from the Governor to the state government.

The DMK has consistently argued that empowering the state government to appoint vice chancellors is a legitimate legislative measure aimed at ensuring efficient governance in higher education institutions. According to party leaders, the President’s return of the bill represents a political maneuver rather than a legal or constitutional necessity. Saravanan emphasized, “We are simply implementing the will of the people. The legislative power of the state government to make such appointments is clear, and the UGC guidelines cited by the BJP are executive directives that do not restrict state legislative authority.”

The controversy has also highlighted structural challenges in Tamil Nadu’s higher education administration. With prolonged vacancies in top university positions, many institutions have functioned under temporary administrative arrangements, affecting governance, academic planning, and administrative continuity. The DMK’s proposed amendment was intended to address these systemic issues, ensuring that regular vice chancellors could be appointed in a timely manner and with the oversight of the elected state government rather than leaving critical decisions in the hands of the Governor.

The political significance of the President returning the bill is heightened by the approaching assembly elections. The DMK faces growing pressure to demonstrate effective governance and assert state autonomy in administrative and educational matters. Party leaders argue that revisiting the bill and potentially reintroducing it will send a strong message regarding the state government’s commitment to academic institutions and its resistance to central interference.

In response to the ongoing tussle, the DMK indicated it is actively exploring legislative and legal options to move forward. State officials emphasized that all measures will comply with constitutional provisions, underscoring that the government seeks to balance legal prudence with political and administrative imperatives. The party’s approach reflects a broader strategy to consolidate public support by defending state autonomy in governance and higher education.

As the Tamil Nadu assembly prepares to convene in January 2026, the fate of the Madras University Amendment Bill remains a focal point of political debate. The developments underscore the continuing tension between state and central authorities, the complex interplay of constitutional powers, and the broader implications for governance and education policy in Tamil Nadu.